City Council will take up the two resolutions following a public forum at City Hall on Monday night.

“It’s going to be a culmination of a long debate,” Weinberger said. “I expect it to be a thoughtful and respectful debate and at the end of it we’ll have a decision.”

Both resolutions would try to block the F-35 from being based at the city’s airport. The Air Guard leases space from the city on the air field.

Earlier this month a forum and vote on the resolutions was postponed after City Attorney Eileen Blackwood said the city did not have the right insurance for airport officials in the event of a lawsuit.

In a memo to the council Blackwood said the F-35s, and federal jurisdiction over their deployment are constitutionally protected and that federal law would override any local or state attempts to block the planes.

Blackwood adds that any attempt from the city to stop Washington from using the airport as they see fit could jeopardize the airport's federal funding.

The first resolution lists a variety of reasons the planes should not come to Vermont. It then reads, "Burlington, as owner of the lands at the Burlington International Airport that are used by the Vermont Air National Guard pursuant to leases and joint use agreements, will use its authority as landowner to prevent the basing of F-35 jets at its airport.”

The second resolution focuses on noise as a potential health risk and would prohibit loud aircraft from using Burlington’s facilities. Some planes would be grandfathered in. A similar clause to the first resolution about the council’s authority to prevent the basing is also present.

“I think both resolutions are very bad,” Weinberger said.

Weinberger said he was particularly concerned about the second resolution as he said it could impact all commercial traffic at the airport.

“I don’t support either and I hope the council will vote them down,” he said.